Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Press Statement by Raveentharan ADUN Batu Uban on the Flash Flood and Landslide near Bukit Gambir

Date: 19 October 2011

The approval of plan by the previous regime is very much suspicious because the developer can build a 3 feet wall and divert the river flow into a drain. This is tantamount to going against nature.

After 40 minutes of downpour, a beautiful but life threatening waterfall appears from nowhere and this has also caused erosion of the rocks and soil.

I think the only solution to arrest this problem is to provide several catchment areas and to build retention ponds at the top of Bukit Gambir. I have already proposed and expressed to the Dewan Undangan Negeri the need to turn this area into an ecopark to preserve the environment as a water catchment area and to build mini reservoir to stop the sudden flash floods. This will also help alleviate the flash flood problems at Jalan Satu and Jalan Enam at Changkat Minden and Sungai Dua area.

I feel very sorry and sympathise for the residents and elderly folks who have to put up with the flash floods and especially those who are staying in low laying areas, and will visit them tomorrow.

Last night I went personally to examine the situation at Mutiara Indah and had requested the DO, Penghulu and JKR Jurutera Daerah to do a study.

RM200K has been allocated by JPS to do the flood mitigation at Sungai Dua. All these water problem originates from Bukit Gambir and flows into Sungai Dua and Sungai Gelugor.

The relevant authorities should come together and solve this problem once and for all. I do not want the residents to live in fear each time there is rain.

Monday, October 10, 2011

Devastation of the natural environment in the name of providing a Car park for Kek Lok Si.
Sunday, 9 October, 2011

A. Illegal Acts

1. Done illegal construction that had intruded into public domain. All constructions are required to be set back from the legal boundaries of the property by between 2.0 – 6.0 metres.
To build beyond the setbacksis illegal and plans would not be approved. Going beyond the legal boundary is a double breach of the law and illegal.If there is an Architect and Professional Engineer this could not have happened.

2. No permit given.

All development and construction on site can only commence after plans have been submitted and approval given by the Local Authority.
Any work done prior to permit being given is illegal.

3. No application for building submitted.

If no plan application is made to the Authority for any development, work done on that site, especially if it is large scale, is extremely serious as public safety is involved and is illegal. How did this happen if they had employed the services of an Architect and Professional Engineer?

4. Destroyed a natural river .

This is a blatant disregard for public property and the environment and water ways.
Catchment areas are protected for collecting surface water run-off. Likewise rivers are protected for the purpose of allowing a natural course of water to flow.Causing it to be changed without consultation is illegal. Damaging it is another illegal act.

5. Illegal excavation and commencement of Earthworks.

Unless earthwork’s permit is given no excavation and earth moving can commence as public safety and properties are involved.

6. Destroyed ancient rocks.

Heritage is not limited to only Georgetown which is an inscribed World Heritage site.
These rocks and flora are an integral part of the Natural heritage. Had all Georgetown’s buildings destroyed there would be no world heritage site today. It is short sighted to destroy these rocks illegally.

7. Destroy an ancient Datuk Kong for the Seven Sisters.

Lack of respect for the local customary religious practice is socially irresponsible. It is an integral part of the rituals of the people living in that location. This is destroying local heritage.

8. Destroyed an edifice donated by the Aw Brothers of Tiger Balm fame.

Philanthropic icons are important milestones in the culture of any society. Eradicating or obliterating such charitable mementos deprives the future generations to appreciate the good deeds of their forebears.

9. Reduced the flow of the water. Narrowed the channel.

This site and river, being part of the natural easement for slowing the flow of water from up-stream and the Ayer Itam dam will cause backing up of water that may lead to flooding in the general location of the development. Flashing flooding due to excessive rainfall is not uncommon. Public risk is involved.

10. Introduce concrete culvert and retaining walls.

This is not ‘green’ in today’s world of sustainability. Retaining walls have been known to fail, eg the Gua Tempurong earth failure. Public risk is involved.

B. Consultants’ breach of professional conduct.

1. Consultant Engineer and architect are collaborators in this construction.

For a large project involving public safety there must be professional consultants.
These consultants employed would have to advised the client of how and what to do.
In this case it would appear that they are collaborators otherwise they would have alerted MPPP of this illegal commencement of works.It would mean that the engineers and architects may have breached the Professional Code of the respective Lembaga.

2. Breached the Professionalism.

All professionals registered with the professional Boards are responsible to act in the manner of public concern and safety.With Professional consultants on this project and this happened means that they are not controlling the project or running it.They may have breached the Professional Code governing their profession.

3. Matter should be raised to the Lembaga.

It should be determined if there were consultants commissioned to do this project. If there were, they should be referred to their respective Boards to look into how the environment was destroyed.

4. In the event of a failure who will be held responsible.

Since no plans were submitted and approved it may be impossible to hold the consultants responsible as they did not submitted any plans.In this case the Government will have to hold the temple responsible.

5. Irresponsibility of the consultants must be highlighted to prevent others from doing similar or encouraging such acts.

Consultants of projects where such activities go on are compelled by law to report the matter to the relevant Authority. They did not. Their inaction need to be exemplified to put all consultants on notice on all future developments.

6. Where are plans for excavation?

It appears the engineers did not submit plans for earthworks. For such extensive earthworks project, some plans for action on site would have been produced.It is important for the MPPP to sight these plans before entertaining any request for consideration. This is needed to ascertain the extent of the damage and the intended proposed damage. Sighting the plans should be mandatory prelude by MPPP.

7. Structural plans not sighted.

It appears the engineers did not submit any structural, footing and foundation stabilisation plans for record with MPPP. For such extensive car parking and earthworks on a slope, some plans for work to start on site would have been prepared.It is important for the MPPP to sight these plans before entertaining any request for consideration. This is needed to ascertain the extent of the structure and the intended proposed structures. Sighting the plans should be mandatory prelude by MPPP.

8. Architect’s plans and sections to show cut and fill of the site.

This is a complex site in any body’s language.Was a site analyse done to study the terrain for cutting, filling, moving of boulders, diverting of the stream, a comparative cross-sectional study of water volume between the existing stream the new Altered stream? If it was prepared we would like to see them. It is important for the MPPP to sight these plans before entertaining any request for consideration. This is needed to ascertain the extent of environmental damage and losses. Sighting these plans should be mandatory prelude by MPPP. Should MPPP do not have the time, man-power or inclination to study them the NGOs will be more than happy to assist on MPPP’s behalf.

9. How were the works carried out? Under what specification?

Designs for the building, earthworks, footings, foundation treatments etc.,would have been prepared by the consultants, as well as BQs and specifications. These documents should be sighted by MPPP as a prelude.

10. Professional consultants are in cohort with developer to the detriment of the public.

Professionalism has been side-lined in this case and the party/ties responsible to be dealt with appropriately. The Consultants have breach public trust. MPPP can and have the right to reject all future submissions by these consultants.

C. Action and Restitution to the People of Penang.

1. Stop work immediately.

Order all equipment off the site.This is to avoid further damage.It is learnt that they are still doing work on site usually after hours when the MPPP officials have gone home. Stern action has to be taken. Setting bad example. Laws should be abided. YB Chow’s instruction means nothing to them.

2. Cannot accept the Submission of Plan application at this stage, in view of the extensive damage to the environment.

MPPP should not accept or approve any more applications to build at KLS. The price paid by the people of Penang the beneficiaries is too high. They have lost too much.

3. An Environmental Audit has to be conducted.

To be done not only for this site but for all the natural assets of Penang. Just as all business corporations have to prepare an audited account annually the same should apply to the government. on the environment and developments A joint effort on the part of the State Government and MPPP is required to protect Penang’s natural resources for the future generations.

4. An Environmental Impact report should be conducted by an independent Consultant to ascertain the extent of damage.

An Environmental Impact report not only for this site but for all the natural assets of Penang.
A joint effort on the part of the State Government and MPPP is required to protect Penang’s natural resources for the future generations.

5. JPS (River Authority) has to prepare a Report of how to rehabilitate the river and its down-steam effect.

It appears neither the MPPP nor the consultant referred this matter to JBS for such extensive encroachment on to rivers and its reserves. JBS ought to have been consulted.Illegal intrusion into river and natural watercourse must be viewed with concerns.It is important for the JBS to sight studies for the damaged river. This is needed to ascertain the extent of the damage and the intended proposed damage. Sighting the study should be mandatory by JBS.

6. The damage is done. Cannot make good what has been destroyed?

How can KLS carry out restitution to the People of Penang? Not in words but in deeds.
The State Government and MPPP to commence such actions.

7. Such irresponsibility towards the environment cannot be allowed to get off lightly.

There must be a check and balance in Life. In this case the Temple Authorities has taken away and destroyed what God has given Man. For what they have taken away they should replace one for the enjoyment of the people as it was intended by God. Any restitution for the damage should be equivalent to all tangible and non-tangible assets destroyed wilfully.

8. Precedent set before for destruction of heritage and historic elements.

Eastern Hotel KL illegally demolished the developer was asked to contribute RM 2 million towards protecting Conservation and Preservation Movement then in its infancy. If this amount for Eastern Hotel is to be used to quantify the recompense, then in today’s monetary terms it should be about RM20milion.KLS should not be allowed further developments. It is a religious institute and must not become and environmental monster that affects the quality of the community it is in.

9. Likewise the KekLok Si Temple should now be asked to provide funds

Today’s equivalent to RM2 in 1990, for the acquisition of a naturally beautiful river of similar features with rocks and trees, to be made into a public space for the people of Penang to enjoy. The money will be used to acquire another natural environment with natural river, streams, rocks and flora that is commensurate to that destroyed by KLS. This will be a public space to be enjoyed by all people of Penang.It will never be able to replace what was destroyed by KLS.

D. Planning a Carpark.

1. Is it a proper planning solution to the traffic problems going to and coming from KLS? Or will this exaggerate the traffic problem with an additional 1000 car parking it will attract more people to drive. This carpark will not solve the traffic problems of Ayer Itam.
Traffic problem of Penang has to be undertaken by the MPPP and Government.

2. Should the carparking station be allowed to be constructed in that location? The location for a carpark is wrong and MPPP should set the planning guidelines for this.

3. Planning of utilitarian projects should be the responsibility of the Authorities and not in the hands of monks. Carparking and traffic problems are to be solved by the Government. Private enterprise cannot solve public problems.

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

1st October, 2011
With reference to the news reported by Malaysiakini titled “Government Shot Down Political Financing Reform Proposal” (http://malaysiakini.com/news/177299), I would like to congratulate the Bar Council for organizing the Forum on Political Financing. This is not a popular subject and many taboos exist. Most, if not all, politicians avoid addressing this subject publicly for fear of negative perception. However, this is a pressing issue among many honest politicians from both sides of the political divide. It is like an elephant in the room.
Like it or not, politicians and political parties need money to run effective campaigns and serving their electorates. The more intense the political environment becomes, the more money is needed. This is especially true for Pakatan Rakyat as we have neither state-owned TVs nor Main Stream Media covering fairly for us.
During the State Assembly sitting on 4th of May, 2011, I have raised this issue to the Penang State Government. Please read the draft of my Dewan Speech 14.0 to 22.0:
http://www.simformalaysia.com/2011/05/05/draft-ucapan-adun-pantai-jerejak-yb-sim-tze-tzin-dalam-sidang-dun-4hb-mei-2011/
http://malaysiakini.com/news/163288
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/5/5/nation/8608634&sec=nation
Based on the report today, the ruling UMNO/BN has proven again that they lack the political will to reform. The former EC Chairman Tan Sri Abdul Rashid has revealed that the ruling federal government had rejected a proposal to reform political financing by providing state funding to political parties. The excuse given was “Malaysia will be crowded with political parties taking advantage of the funding”. To me, this is an utterly lame excuse.
I vehemently urge the Prime Minister to show his political will for reforms. Several organizations, including Transparency International, have approached him pertaining to this matter. He once remarked that he wanted Malaysia to be “The Best Democracy”. The propitious moment has arrived for him to walk the talk.
I also hereby urge the Parliament Select Committee on Election Reform to discuss and introduce State sponsored Political Financing to build a true democracy. The Parliament Select Committee (PSC) must be able to discuss wide-ranging and much needed Electoral Reforms in order to move Malaysia Forward in its quest to become the so-called “Best Democracy” mentioned above.
For too long, political parties, especially UMNO/BN, have relied heavily on dubious financial sources from lobby groups or parties with vested interests. This has resulted in a deeply embedded culture of corruption and nepotism in the ruling BN government. Even former Prime Minister Tun Mahathir has admitted the existence of such dubious funding in his party.
In today’s increasingly competitive political environment, political parties are racing with each other for more political influence. They have to organize all kinds of activities such as open house, providing financial help to the poor and needy, political ceramah, print leaflets etc. Like it or not, these activities incur expenses. It is also not very economically expedient in maintaining a service center, hiring of political aides and keeping the party divisions running. The killer part is during an election campaign when large amount of money is needed to meet inevitable expenses in a short period of time. Political parties or political leaders, therefore, are in constant need of political funds. Many politicians are forced to raise money on a regular basis. Their sources of funding could come from small donations or larger corporate donations. Many have donated sincerely without asking for favors but such sources could also inevitably open the possibilities of political lobbying by big corporations in time to come. Those who do not raise money from the public are forced to spend their own and be financially burdened. This has deterred good people from joining politics.
I would like to reiterate my view that the PM and PSC must take lead to reform because electoral matters come are under federal jurisdiction. On the other hand, the state governments held by Pakatan Rakyat could also explore such initiatives in accordance with the law. I am well aware of the jurisdiction and legal challenges of such initiatives. The various State Governments can set up committees to look into the legality and feasibility of such initiatives in electoral reforms. In Penang, the State Government needs to fork out only RM8 million to ensure fair play in elections. This small amount is a big step in improving democracy.
I am acutely aware of members of the public who might be skeptical of such an idea. They might not be supportive of using taxpayers’ money for funding political activities. Nevertheless this is just a small and necessary investment to keep politicians clean and to curb corrupt practices. Therefore, for such idea to be accepted, we have to provide sufficient political education and public awareness campaigns. Political leaders and parties must now start discussing these issues to educate and change public opinion.
Malaysia must introduce political finance reforms to emerge as a healthy democracy. Malaysian political parties as well as politicians must break away from conventional methods of private donation. The Parliament Select Committee on Election Reform must take lead to suggest State-sponsored funding for political parties. This will provide a level playing field for political parties and politicians to organize their activities and election campaigns. Tighter laws must be introduced to prevent dubious or covert political fundraising. Furthermore, this will help attract more talents to join politics in future. According to Prof Terence Gomez, 70% of democratic countries around the world have introduced State-sponsored Political Financing to prevent lobbying by funders. It is high time for Malaysia to follow suit.

Statement: People Before Profit – Objection to Boustead Land Reclamation
2nd Oct 2011

I would like to extend my unequivocal support to the residents of Putra Marine, Gold Coast, Bay Garden and the surrounding communities in objecting a possible land reclamation project by Boustead. As their state assemblyman, I fully understand their anxiety and fully support their democratic rights to voice up against a greedy corporate giant that might soon affect their lives.

The whole episode of this project goes back 3 years ago. Boustead Holdings Bhd is a corporate giant closely linked to UMNO. It got the approval from the previous administration to construct a high-rise hotel within the UNESCO World Heritage Zone. After Georgetown obtained its UNESCO Heritage Status, Boustead Hotel was requested to reduce the original proposed height to a max 18m in accordance with the new guidelines.

As a result, the current state government under the leadership of YAB Lim Guan Eng was forced to negotiate a settlement with Boustead. Failing to do so, the state is at risk of facing law suits amounting to hundred of millions of ringgit.

I urge Boustead to put the Rakyat and the hard earned Penang Heritage Status first before financial profits. The UNESCO World Heritage is a crown jewel to Penang and any corporate company must respect this status. It is utterly greedy for some corporate companies to calculate losses and threaten to sue the State Government for hundreds of millions of ringgit simply for adhering to UNESCO guidelines. It is equally unscrupulous to force the State Government to compensate them by reclaiming large tracts of land to cover their losses. The Government Linked Companies belongs to the Rakyat. They have to lend their ears to the voice of the Rakyat too!

As the State Assemblyman of this area, I have clearly raised my objection and reservation as early as May, 2011. In my Dewan speech, I put forward my question to the Chief Minister. Please read my Dewan Speech here, para 30 to 35:
http://www.simformalaysia.com/2011/05/05/draft-ucapan-adun-pantai-jerejak-yb-sim-tze-tzin-dalam-sidang-dun-4hb-mei-2011/

After my speech in the august House, I have raised my objections not less than 5 times to the Chief Minister himself during formal and informal settings. I have also arranged 2 meetings for the RA with the Chief Minister. At those meetings, the residents have repeatedly expressed their objection to the CM.

I hope the Chief Minister will stand firm and not succumb to the pressure from a Corporate Giant. The Rakyat will fully support you in negotiating for an amicable solution. We want to send a clear message to Boustead and that is: “People before Profits”!